Abstract
Defamation law is a long-standing research focus. Previous studies on defamation law have pointed out the importance of balancing two fundamental issues in law, namely, protection of reputation and freedom of speech. The present corpus-based legal study, using ConcGram 1.0 as the analytical tool, examined the phraseological profile of reported cases on defamation in Hong Kong in order to find out the types of defense and the approach to meaning in the defamation case law in Hong Kong. Regarding defenses to a defamation claim, the results show that fair comment, qualified privilege, and justification are the most prevalent types, that unintentional defamation is not used at all, and that there has been a noticeable shift from fair comment to honest comment. As for the approach to meaning, the ordinary and natural approach is found to be a pivotal means of solving the threshold problem in defamation cases, that is, whether the words involved are defamatory or not.
Funding statement: Funding: The work described in this paper was substantially supported by National Social Sciences Foundation (Project No.: 15BYY012) a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Project No.: 1-ZV7D).
References
Ahmad, K. 2005. Terminology in text. Tuscan Word Centre Workshop. Siena, Italy. June, 2005.Search in Google Scholar
Bhatia, V. K. 2004. Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Busuttil, G., P. Milmo, R. Parkes, W. V. H. Rogers & C. Walker. 2008. Gatley on libel and slander, 11th edn. London: Sweet and Maxwell.Search in Google Scholar
Carter-Ruck, P. F. 1990. Memoirs of a libel lawyer. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Search in Google Scholar
Chan, C. 2003. Breaking Singapore’s regrettable tradition of chilling free speech with defamation laws. Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review 26.2 315–339.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, X. & P. H. Ang 2008. Civil defamation law in China. Media & Arts Law Review 13(1). 44–75.Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, L. 2010a. A semiotic interpretation of genre: court judgments as an example. Semiotica 182(1/4). 189–213.10.1515/semi.2010.053Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, L. 2010b. Discourse and judicial thinking: A corpus-based study of court judgments in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Mainland China. International Journal of Speech, Language, and the Law 17(2). 295–298.10.1558/ijsll.v17i2.295Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, L. & W. Cheng. 2014. Epistemic modality and evidential models in law: A corpus-based comparison of civil cases in Hong Kong and Scotland. English for Specific Purposes 32(4). 15–26.10.1016/j.esp.2013.07.006Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, W., C. Greaves, J. McHardy Sinclair & M. Warren. 2009. Uncovering the extent of the phraseological tendency: Towards a systematic analysis of concgrams. Applied Linguistics 30(2). 236–252.10.1093/applin/amn039Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, W., C. Greaves & M. Warren. 2006. From n-gram to skipgram to concgram. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 11(4). 411–433.10.1075/ijcl.11.4.04cheSearch in Google Scholar
Collins, M. 2010. The law of defamation and the internet, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cottrell, J. 2003. Fair comment, judges, and politics in Hong Kong. Melbourne University Law Review 27(1). 33–64.Search in Google Scholar
Docherty, B. 2000. Defamation law: Positive jurisprudence. Harvard Human Rights Journal 13. 263–284.Search in Google Scholar
FitzGerald, D, & R. Leung. 2007. Defamation of corporate entities in Hong Kong. http://www.twobirds.com/en/news/articles/2007/defamation-corporate-entities-hk (accessed 10 October 2015).Search in Google Scholar
George, P. 2006. Defamation law in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. 2003. Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Greaves, C. 2009. ConcGram 1.0. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cls.1Search in Google Scholar
Greaves, C. & M. Warren. 2007. Concgramming: A computer-driven approach to learning the phraseology of English. ReCALL 17(3). 287–306.10.1017/S0958344007000432Search in Google Scholar
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524773Search in Google Scholar
Liebman, B. L. 2006. Innovation through intimidation: An empirical account of defamation litigation in China. Harvard International Law Journal 47. 33–109.Search in Google Scholar
Mau, S. D. 2010. Tort law in Hong Kong: An introductory guide. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Search in Google Scholar
McNamara, L. 2007. Reputation and defamation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199231454.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Mellinkoff, D. 1963. The language of the law. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Search in Google Scholar
Milo, D. 2008. Defamation and freedom of speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199204922.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Nicholson, M. A. 2000. McLibel: A case study in English defamation law. Wisconsin International Law Journal 18(1). 1–144.Search in Google Scholar
Norrie, K. M. 1995. Defamation and related actions in Scots law. London: Butterworths.Search in Google Scholar
Pember, D. & C. Calvert. 2006. Mass media law, 14th edn. New York: McGraw Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Philip, G. 2011. Coloring meaning: Collocation and connotation in figurative language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.43Search in Google Scholar
Rolph, D. 2008. Reputation, celebrity, and defamation law. Aldershot: Ashgate.Search in Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McHardy. 1996. The search for units of meaning. Textus 9(1). 75–106.10.4324/9780203594070-6Search in Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McHardy. 2001. Preface. In M. Ghadessy, A. Henry & R. L. Roseberry (eds.), Small corpus studies and ELT, vii–xv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.5.01sinSearch in Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McHardy. 2004. Trust the text: Language, corpus, and discourse. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203594070Search in Google Scholar
Teubert, W. & R. Krishnamurthy. 2007. Corpus linguistics. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Warren, M. 2010. Online corpus for specific purposes. ICAME Journal 34. 169–188.Search in Google Scholar
Weisenhaus, D., J. Cottrell, Y. M. Ning & M. Hartmann. 2007. Hong Kong media law: A guide for journalists and media professionals. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Wong, P. K. & K. K. Sin. 2003. Linguistic issues in the Chinese court judgments of Hong Kong. In Q. S. Zhou et al. (eds.), New perspectives in the study of language and law, 193–201. Beijing: Law Press.Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
